Loans (UXPROD-788)

[UXPROD-1659] Missing pieces and damaged items Created: 23/Apr/19  Updated: 03/Jan/24

Status: Open
Project: UX Product
Components: None
Affects versions: None
Fix versions: None
Parent: Loans

Type: New Feature Priority: TBD
Reporter: Emma Boettcher Assignee: Charlotte Whitt
Resolution: Unresolved Votes: 0
Labels: inventory, round_iv
Remaining Estimate: Not Specified
Time Spent: Not Specified
Original estimate: Not Specified

Issue links:
Defines
is defined by UIIN-562 Settings page. Inventory > Item > Ite... Draft
is defined by UICHKIN-186 Show item damaged information at chec... Draft
is defined by UICHKOUT-634 Show item damaged information at chec... Draft
Relates
relates to MODINVSTOR-287 UIIN-593: Add damage description prop... Open
relates to UIIN-593 Item record. Accordion Condition. Add... Open
relates to MODINVSTOR-286 UIIN-458: Introduce Damaged Status Re... Closed
relates to UIIN-562 Settings page. Inventory > Item > Ite... Draft
Potential Workaround: Use item notes and manual fees/fines to note damage and charge patrons.
Epic Link: Loans
Front End Estimate: XL < 15 days
Front End Estimator: Michal Kuklis
Front-End Confidence factor: Low
Back End Estimate: Large < 10 days
Back End Estimator: Marc Johnson
Estimation Notes and Assumptions: Assumes that marking items as damaged or pieces missing happens separately to the main check in, and that the workflow is entirely UI based
Development Team: Prokopovych
Kiwi Planning Points (DO NOT CHANGE): 2
PO Rank: 70
Rank: Chalmers (Impl Aut 2019): R4
Rank: Chicago (MVP Sum 2020): R4
Rank: Cornell (Full Sum 2021): R4
Rank: Duke (Full Sum 2021): R1
Rank: 5Colleges (Full Jul 2021): R4
Rank: FLO (MVP Sum 2020): R2
Rank: GBV (MVP Sum 2020): R2
Rank: Grand Valley (Full Sum 2021): R1
Rank: hbz (TBD): R2
Rank: Hungary (MVP End 2020): R1
Rank: Lehigh (MVP Summer 2020): R4
Rank: Mainz (Full TBD): R2
Rank: MO State (MVP June 2020): R2
Rank: TAMU (MVP Jan 2021): R1
Rank: U of AL (MVP Oct 2020): R2

 Description   

Current situation or problem:
FOLIO allows items to be marked damaged (or not damaged) and has missing pieces and missing pieces description fields. Users are alerted at check in or check out to the presence of missing pieces. FOLIO also allows fees and fines to be charged and linked to specific items or loans. However, one cannot simultaneously enter a description of missing pieces and charge a user for them, or simultaneously enter a description of damage and charge a user for this.

The values for damaged are limited to damaged/not damaged.

In scope

  • Expand values for damaged to be a tenant-configurable list
  • Present information about known damage while checking item in or out
  • Allow user to mark damage and missing pieces when checking item in or out, and charge patron a fine/fee

Out of scope

Use case(s)
Circulation staff get a multipiece score back that's missing one of the parts. After talking with the patron and determining the part is lost forever, they charge the patron for the cost of replacing the part rather than billing them for the entire item.

Proposed solution/stories

Links to additional info

Questions

  • Is the description of damage a repeatable field? (RA SIG has previously said it could be)
  • should user be notified of existing damage at check in or check out?
    • what is workflow if check in staff get a damaged item? Do they check item record first to see if damage was already noted, or check item in to see if they get a damage pop-up? if the latter, and there is no damage pop-up, will they be able to note damage before loan is anonymized?


 Comments   
Comment by Anya [ 03/May/19 ]

FC: for go-live we need a way to know that it was damaged or a part is missing - what is used now is a combo of the system and not system notes- a fully bakes solution is nice, but not required.

Comment by Marc Johnson [ 20/May/19 ]

Emma Boettcher Can you expand upon:

the structure of how that information is recorded on the item record

Does that mean that we want to keep this information in a different form to what we currently have? (especially as we have been talking about damaged status recently)

Comment by Charlotte Whitt [ 11/Jun/19 ]

Hi Emma Boettcher and Marc Johnson - I have related my existing UIIN stories about implementation of item damaged - to this new feature.

Thin thread would be implementation of: UIIN-458 Closed - and then we'd have the existing select list to work
Next step would be to implement the reference table.

Emma Boettcher, did the RA SIG talk to you about having the array of Item damage data being repeatable?

CC: Cate Boerema

Comment by Ann-Marie Breaux (Inactive) [ 06/Dec/23 ]

Hi Stephanie Buck Please review this feature in the Prokopovych backlog when you have a chance. Do you think it would belong with Vega/fines & Fees? Or some other team? Thank you!

Generated at Fri Feb 09 00:17:24 UTC 2024 using Jira 1001.0.0-SNAPSHOT#100246-sha1:7a5c50119eb0633d306e14180817ddef5e80c75d.